AD-HOC COMMUNITY POWER COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA Friday, February 12, 2021, 8:00 AM Virtual Zoom Meeting* Members: Staff: Peter Hansel, Chair Rhett Lamb, Community Development Director Councilor Mike Giacomo Mari Brunner, Planner Dr. Ann Shedd Paul Roth Dan Belluscio 1. Call to Order and Roll Call 2. Discussion: Draft Community Power Plan 3. Keene Community Power website (KeeneCommunityPower.com) 4. HB 315, “Relative to the aggregation of electric customers” a. Public Hearing: Friday, February 12, 2021 at 3:00 PM 5. New Business 6. Upcoming Meetings: a. Friday, March 5, 2021 at 8:00 am (regular meeting) b. Tuesday, March 30, 2021 at 12:00 pm and 6:30 pm (public hearings) 7. Adjourn *To Join the Meeting: The public may join the meeting online by visiting www.zoom.us/join or by calling the toll-free # (888) 475-4499 and entering the Meeting ID: 858 5592 8244. If you encounter any issues accessing this meeting, please call (603) 209-4697 during the meeting. City of Keene New Hampshire AD HOC COMMUNITY POWER COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES Friday, January 15, 2021 8:00 AM Remote Meeting via Zoom Members Present: Staff Present: Councilor Mike Giacomo Rhett Lamb, Community Development Dr. Ann Shedd Director Paul Roth Mari Brunner, Planner Dan Belluscio Members Not Present: Guests: Peter Hansel, Chair Daria Mark, Good Energy Patrick Roche, Good Energy Robert Hayden, Good Energy Mari Brunner read a prepared statement explaining how the Emergency Order #12, pursuant to Executive Order #2020-04 issued by the Governor of New Hampshire, waives certain provisions of RSA 91-A (which regulates the operation of public body meetings) during the declared COVID-19 State of Emergency. 1) Call to Order and Roll Call Mari Brunner called the meeting to order at 8:03 AM. Roll call was conducted. Paul Roth motioned to have Dr. Ann Shedd act as temporary Chair in the absence of Chair Peter Hansel. Councilor Mike Giacomo seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. 1) Approval of December 4, 2020 Meeting Minutes Paul Roth moved to approve the December 4, 2020 minutes as presented. Councilor Mike Giacomo seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. 2) Preliminary Survey Results Daria Mark, a representative from Good Energy, reviewed the results that had come in over the past month from the Community Power survey. These results helped inform what should be included in the draft Community Power Plan. The survey began on December 8, 2021 and was disseminated online as well as in print in the Monadnock Shopper newspaper. It ran for approximately one month, ending on January 7, 2021, and rendered 126 total responses, mostly from the online version. Page 2 of 56 Daria Mark paused and asked the committee if they had heard any conversation or mentions of the survey out in the community. Dan Belluscio replied that he hadn’t but reasoned that everyone is fairly isolated during the pandemic, so not a lot of external conversations are taking place. Councilor Mike Giacomo stated that he shared the survey with the neighborhood groups in his north central region, reaching about 100 people. Daria Mark continued with the review and stated they saw a predominantly residential response, with 82 percent of survey takers owning their home, and 6 percent already generating electricity with solar panels. To help the public understand what the survey asked about, they created two videos. The first explaining Community Power, and the second answering how it impacts the City of Keene. Daria Mark encouraged the committee to take a look at those videos, which are located at KeeneEnergyPlan.com/CommunityPower. She mentioned these would be great resources to share if people are wondering what the program is all about. The following data from the survey results was presented by Daria Mark. Demographics: The survey asked two demographics questions to measure diversity of responses. Results showed a good spread on age and income. Electricity Supply: A majority of the survey respondents use Eversource but 13 percent have taken action to find a different supplier. The next question explored what people are looking for when they seek a different supplier. Results showed that 69% of respondents were looking for a better rate. The other respondents wanted more renewable content. Community Power Goals: This multiple choice question explored what the community wanted to see from the Community Power program. The highest response was a desire to see an increase in local renewable energy. Other popular answers were lower energy bills, better rates, and creating local jobs. Renewables and Price: This question was aimed to tease out community sentiments with regards to adding renewable energy versus the cost. 8% of respondents did not want more renewable electricity but 92% said they did. Breaking down that 92% further revealed that 50% of respondents are willing to pay more for renewable electricity and 42 percent want more renewable electricity if they can pay about the same amount they currently pay. Paul Roth asked if the last 2 bars on the Renewables and Price chart were additive (the 19 and 31 percent). Daria Mark replied that if a respondent chose the option of wanting more renewable energy, they then had to choose from three options: wanting to pay the same, willing to pay a small amount more, or willing to pay more in general. Those responses are seen in the last 3 bars (42, 19 and 31 percent) and represent how much more the participants want renewable energy. Councilor Mike Giacomo stated with regards to price sensitivity that these responses seem to be cut down the middle, 50% are able or willing to pay more, versus 50% of respondents not able or willing to pay more. Maria Dark agreed Page 3 of 56 and added that the 31 percent of respondents that are willing to pay more is the demographic they’d try to target in an opt-up campaign. Income information was asked on the survey to reveal any trends in responses based on respondent income level. The next chart showed that respondents with higher income levels are not the only ones who are interested in more renewable energy. The lightest blue category represents income under $50,000, the next blue is $50,000-100,000, and the dark blue is greater than 100,000. This is important because it shows representation from all different income levels in favor of more renewable energy. Councilor Mike Giacomo commented that the chart shows there’s about a 65-35 split within the under $50,000 cohort between the ‘willing to pay extra’ category and the ‘want to pay the same amount’ category, which tells them there’s willingness and actual price sensitivity to be able to afford the higher rate, which is great. There’s also no question that this cohort is in favor of more renewable energy, but about 50 percent are saying they probably can’t afford a higher rate, and he wants to make sure they are paying attention to all representations in the community and going about things in a cost-effective way. Daria Mark wondered if the people who said they don’t want more renewable energy, in the under $50,000 cohort, were saying it out of concern for increased prices. She and Councilor Giacomo agreed that this could be possible because it has been a narrative they’ve seen in the past. Energy Efficiency: They included 3 questions to tease out how much and what has been done in the community with regards to energy efficiency. The first question asked if they had done an energy audit. Around 73% of respondents answered yes, which showed there’s still a lot of potential when thinking about saving energy. The next two questions attempted to discover if there was a reason they hadn’t done an energy audit. The first asked if they keep their thermostat lower than they would like to save money, and 71% of respondents answered yes. The next question asked if their home is drafty or are their energy costs high, and about half of respondents said yes. Overall, the results showed potential on improvement for reducing energy use. The next chart used the income levels to answer if getting an energy audit had to do with finances. The results showed that it was not a matter of income, it was more about other factors like time. Outreach Channel Effectiveness: The survey asked people how they heard about the survey with options of the newspaper (Shopper news, Keene Sentinel), online (City website, social media), e-mail, or other. Most respondents heard about the survey through a newspaper and the next highest response was one of the online options. Conclusions – The survey results demonstrated that there is very strong support for a default product with extra renewables, an option that offers additional renewable content, and desire for the most cost-effective option. Page 4 of 56 3) Overview of Draft Community Power Plan Patrick Roche from Good Energy stated that the draft Community Power Plan starts with Keene’s vision of electricity to be 100% renewable by 2030, and the 2050 goal of thermal and transportation to be 100% renewable energy. He stated the plan is meant to be a framework that spells out how they will approach their goals and noted that it leaves room for innovation so the program can evolve. The following was Patrick Roche’s review of the plan. Program Vision: The first piece of the plan is successful launch. They focused on economic value that also increases renewable energy for the community and supports the growth of new renewable energy in the region.